MaxBetto
< Back

Max Houkes vs Daniel Siniakov

Tennis
2025-09-06 00:49
Start: 2025-09-06 14:00

Summary

No pick
EV: -0.047

Current Odds

Home 2.7|Away 1.565
Best Odds

Match Info

Match key: Max Houkes_Daniel Siniakov_2025-09-06

Analysis

Summary: No value at current prices: Houkes looks the stronger player but the book market prices him slightly too short for positive EV; we require ~1.667 or longer to back him.

Highlights

  • Houkes: larger match sample and higher career win percentage (~59%)
  • Current favorite price (1.588) implies ~63% — above our ~60% estimate

Pros

  • + Houkes' greater match volume and marginally superior record favor him in an ITF semi
  • + Both players have clay experience so surface risk is limited

Cons

  • - Recent form snippets are mixed for both players and sample sizes (especially Siniakov) are small
  • - Market already favors Houkes; current price does not present positive expected value

Details

We compared the market prices (Max Houkes 1.588 implied win ~62.97%) to our read of the players from the provided profiles. Max Houkes has a larger sample (36-25, ~59.0% career win rate across 61 matches) and slightly stronger record than Daniel Siniakov (12-11, ~52.2% across 23 matches), and both show recent activity on clay. Given Houkes' deeper match experience and marginally better career metrics we estimate his true chance slightly above 60% for this matchup, but the current price (1.588) implies ~63.0% — too short to offer positive expected value. To be profitable we're looking for at least ~1.667 on Houkes; at 1.588 the EV is negative. There is no value on Siniakov at the quoted 2.29 because our estimated win probability for him (~40%) is well below the implied ~43.7%. Therefore we recommend taking no side at the listed prices.

Key factors

  • Max Houkes larger sample size and higher career win rate (36-25 vs 12-11)
  • Both players have clay results; no clear surface advantage to overturn the market
  • Current market price for Houkes (1.588) implies a probability slightly above our estimate → negative EV